US Elections 2020 (geopolitics, informed debate, no ad hominems)

Biden

14 (66.7%)

Trump

7 (33.3%)

Total Members Voted: 21

Voting closed: November 02, 2020, 06:25:59 pm

[James Clark]

Trump finds this difficult to do because he just started in politics four years ago.  Biden on the other hand, has been in politics so long he can change colors by the second like a chameleon and has forgotten who he is because of it.

You can't possibly believe this.

[faberryman]

You can't possibly believe this.

Yeah, it is unclear if Trump is a very stable genius or a slow learner.

[Jim Pascoe]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53597975

TRUMP WANT TO POSTPONE THE ELECTION

Well I suppose this is one way to avoid a drubbing in the election.......

[kers]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53597975

TRUMP WANT TO POSTPONE THE ELECTION

Well I suppose this is one way to avoid a drubbing in the election.......

I guess he wants to postpone them by 4 years... By that time all US citizen have died from Covid-19.

[Alan Goldhammer]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53597975

TRUMP WANT TO POSTPONE THE ELECTION

Well I suppose this is one way to avoid a drubbing in the election.......

That cannot happen without an act of Congress.  It is Federal Law under 3 USC section 1 that specifies the election to be held on the first Tuesday of November following the first of the month.

[faberryman]

He must have done something really stupid that has not been reported yet to float this distraction.

[Alan Klein]

He must have something really stupid that has not been reported yet to float this distraction.

As long as you're talking about Trump daily, he's happy. 

[hogloff]

As long as you're talking about Trump daily, he's happy.

Well people have been talking about Trump daily...but there are many days Trump does not look to happy.

[TechTalk]

You're re-writing electoral history.

Absolutely nothing in what I wrote, regarding 2016 polls, was a rewrite of electoral history! If you feel otherwise, I invite you to specify what I wrote that leads you to believe so.

[TechTalk]

Hillary was favored 10 to 1.

I was trying to make a point.  OK, so she had an 87% chance of winning one month before the election.  That's about 7 to 1? Then she went down to a still large
2 1/2 to 1

First we have 10 to 1, then 7 to 1, then 2-1/2 to 1, do I have any other bidders before we close the auction?

[TechTalk]

No one expected her to lose, including Trump.  Everyone was stunned.

Try typing - Trump could win in 2016 - into your Google machine or copy and paste it. See what you come up with in the way of results. Every major news outlet said that Trump could win, but had a narrow path to the electoral votes to do so.

The top hit that came up when I did that search was from CNN on Sept. 7, 2016 entitled "How Donald Trump Could Win". Here's an excerpt: "Trump and Hillary Clinton enter the critical post-Labor Day phase of the campaign in a dead heat. A CNN/ORC national poll released Tuesday finds Trump ahead of Clinton by two points -- 45% to 43% -- among likely voters. The race is also tight among registered voters, where Clinton has a three point advantage. Both findings are within the margin of error. The narrowing of the race is a remarkable feat for Trump, who was down 10 points a month ago in CNN's Poll of Polls"  https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/06/politics/How Donald Trump could win

The #2 hit was from the Washington Post July 26, 2016 entitled "Yes, Of Course Donald Trump Can Win". #3 From 538 Sep. 15, 2016 "How Trump Could Win The White House While Losing The Popular Vote". #4 Politico September 14, 2016 "Time to Face It: Trump Really Could Win This". If you want more, I can provide a lot of stories from various news sources up to election day that said despite the consistent lead of Clinton in national polling (which she won, by the way) that winning the 50 +1 (District of Columbia) individual states needed for an electoral victory was far from certain. The AP (Associated Press) had a forecast of 274 electoral votes for Clinton the day before election and seeing that you need at least 270; they weren't exactly forecasting a sure bet or a certain outcome.

What's notable in my memory though, and the guy who nailed it with predicting that Trump would win and exactly how he would do it, is Michael Moore. He was all over the media saying not that Trump could win, but saying Trump will win. I hate to burst your bubble of "No one expected her to lose" by pointing to a scourge for conservatives like Michael Moore; but here's just an excerpt of what he was saying before the 2016 election...

"And this is where the math comes in. In 2012, Mitt Romney lost by 64 electoral votes. Add up the electoral votes cast by Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. It’s 64. All Trump needs to do to win is to carry, as he’s expected to do, the swath of traditional red states from Idaho to Georgia (states that’ll never vote for Hillary Clinton), and then he just needs these four rust belt states. He doesn’t need Florida. He doesn’t need Colorado or Virginia. Just Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. And that will put him over the top. This is how it will happen in November."  https://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/

I think that perhaps you're remembering what happened after the election, when conservative media was giddy and gleefully proclaiming that the "biased polls" and the "liberal media" were all wrong as usual; they were all certain that Hillary was going to win before the election. That's not what happened before the election. I think perhaps that rewriting of history is what you remember.

[faberryman]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53597975

TRUMP WANT TO POSTPONE THE ELECTION

Well I suppose this is one way to avoid a drubbing in the election.......

This is all about protecting Trump's fragile ego. If he loses, he will claim it is because of voter fraud, you know basically lie to himself so he doesn't have a psychotic breakdown from losing, and if he wins, he will claim it is in spite of voter fraud, which will really give him a psychological boost. We saw this in 2016 when he claimed that voter fraud was the reason he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by 3,000,000 votes.  Of course nobody believes that, but it doesn't matter as long as he believes it. Either way we will never hear the end of it. There is no escape from Trump. Jean-Paul Sartre anticipated this in No Exit.

[Alan Klein]

First we have 10 to 1, then 7 to 1, then 2-1/2 to 1, do I have any other bidders before we close the auction?

there's no auction.  The polls had clinton 9-1 odds down to a still significant 2 1/2 -1 odds.  Every anti Trump talking head on left wing cable turned ashen faced when they learned Hillary lost.

[faberryman]

there's no auction.  The polls had clinton 9-1 odds down to a still significant 2 1/2 -1 odds.  Every anti Trump talking head on left wing cable turned ashen faced when they learned Hillary lost.

9:1 is new. Where did that one come from? What happened to 10:1 and 7:1? It sounds like you are just making these up and then forgetting which one you made up last.

Tip of the day: Get a little notebook and write down your posts as you go along. It is easier to find them in a notebook than scrolling through all the posts in all the threads you participate in. Then when you make stuff up at least you'll be consistent.

[Alan Klein]

9:1 is new. Where did that one come from? What happened to 10:1 and 7:1? It sounds like you are just making these up and then forgetting which one you made up last.

Tip of the day: Get a little notebook and write down your posts as you go along. It is easier to find them in a notebook than scrolling through all the posts in all the threads you participate in.

You're right.  It wasn't 9-1 it was 7-1, still a huge advantage Clinton had a month before the election.  It dropped to 2 1/2-1 Clinton right before the election.  Still, a huge advantage that everyone assumed would allow her to win.  The Democrats and the left were shocked when she lost.  She refused to acknowledge the lost the night of the election and tried desperately to get electors to change their vote.  It turned out she was the one who didn't want to accept the loss.  I think you ought to check this two minute video from CNN, not a Trump favored cable station.  It will remind you and others just how much of a longshot victory this was for Trump. 
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/11/06/relive-the-stunning-2016-election-night-orig-mg.cnn/video/playlists/barack-obama-and-hillary-clinton/

[faberryman]

You're right.  It wasn't 9-1 it was 7-1, still a huge advantage Clinton had a month before the election.  It dropped to 2 1/2-1 Clinton right before the election.  Still, a huge advantage that everyone assumed would allow her to win.  The Democrats and the left were shocked when she lost.  She refused to acknowledge the lost the night of the election and tried desperately to get electors to change their vote.  It turned out she was the one who didn't want to accept the loss.  I think you ought to check this two minute video from CNN, not a Trump favored cable station.  It will remind you and others just how much of a longshot victory this was for Trump. 
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/11/06/relive-the-stunning-2016-election-night-orig-mg.cnn/video/playlists/barack-obama-and-hillary-clinton/

It sounds like that is a very important moment for you to re-live.

[PeterAit]

It sounds like that is a very important moment for you to re-live.

Except that Trump lost the election by a large margin and "won" only because of an electoral college fluke that would not have happened if a mere 70,000 votes (IIRC) had gone the other way. The main skill his campaign had was tarring Clinton with so many lies and innuendos that many people who otherwise would have voted for her just stayed home on election day. And he is starting the same BS all over again. We saw a "Willie Horton" (AKA "frighten the white people")style ad last night where they claim Biden wants to defund the police.  Biden has never said that and in fact has explicitly said he does not want to defund. Yet there are enough poorly informed saps out there who will believe this.

[Alan Klein]

Except that Trump lost the election by a large margin and "won" only because of an electoral college fluke that would not have happened if a mere 70,000 votes (IIRC) had gone the other way. The main skill his campaign had was tarring Clinton with so many lies and innuendos that many people who otherwise would have voted for her just stayed home on election day. And he is starting the same BS all over again. We saw a "Willie Horton" (AKA "frighten the white people")style ad last night where they claim Biden wants to defund the police.  Biden has never said that and in fact has explicitly said he does not want to defund. Yet there are enough poorly informed saps out there who will believe this.

Let's not fight over the electoral system again.  It's the way it is.  Even Biden is addressing that by campaigning in the swing states for this election.  He knows he has NY and CA and doesn;t even have to go there.  Where's the fairness in that? 

In any case, he telling all the swing state voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, etc. how he intends to get them jobs, the same arguments Trump made in the 2016 election.  So both sides are aware of the electoral system as they are every election and campaign accordingly.  By the way, Trump didn't have to "tar" Clinton.  She did it herself calling all the swing state workers and other voters in the middle of the country "deplorables" being snotty and "holier than though".  Trump on the other hand championed them, something they hadn't felt in decades. 

[faberryman]

Yet there are enough poorly informed saps out there who will believe this.

That's the problem with democracy. Half the voters are on the left side of the bell curve.

[Alan Klein]

That's the problem with democracy. Half the voters are on the left side of the bell curve.

A lot of smart people don't have an ounce of common sense.